I want to develop a multi-threaded C++ application (where eventually most of the C++ code would become generated by the application itself, which could be viewed as a high-level domain specific language) on Linux/AMD64/Debian with GCC 4.6 (and probably latest C++11 standard).
I really want to use Boehm's conservative garbage collector for all my heap allocations, because I want to allocate with new(GC)
and never bother about delete
. I am assuming that Boehm's GC is working well enough.
The main motivation for using C++ (instead of C) is all the algorithms and collections std::map
... std::vector
provided by the C++ standard library.
Boehm's GC provide a gc_allocator<T>
template (in its file gc/gc_allocator.h).
Should I redefine operator ::new
as Boehm's one?
Or should I use all the collection templates with an explicit allocator template argument set to some gc_allocator
? I don't understand exactly the role of the second template argument (the allocator) to std::vector? Is it used to allocate the vector internal data, or to allocate each individual element?
And what about std::string
-s? How to make their data GC-allocated? Should I have my own string, using basic_string
template with gc_allocator
? Is there some way to get the internal array-s of char allocated with GC_malloc_atomic
not GC_malloc
?
Or do you advise not using Boehm GC with an application compiled by g++ ?
Regards.
To answer partly my own question, the following code
// file myvec.cc
#include <gc/gc.h>
#include <gc/gc_cpp.h>
#include <gc/gc_allocator.h>
#include <vector>
class Myvec {
std::vector<int,gc_allocator<int> > _vec;
public:
Myvec(size_t sz=0) : _vec(sz) {};
Myvec(const Myvec& v) : _vec(v._vec) {};
const Myvec& operator=(const Myvec &rhs)
{ if (this != &rhs) _vec = rhs._vec; return *this; };
void resize (size_t sz=0) { _vec.resize(sz); };
int& operator [] (size_t ix) { return _vec[ix];};
const int& operator [] (size_t ix) const { return _vec[ix]; };
~Myvec () {};
};
extern "C" Myvec* myvec_make(size_t sz=0) { return new(GC) Myvec(sz); }
extern "C" void myvec_resize(Myvec*vec, size_t sz) { vec->resize(sz); }
extern "C" int myvec_get(Myvec*vec, size_t ix) { return (*vec)[ix]; }
extern "C" void myvec_put(Myvec*vec, size_t ix, int v) { (*vec)[ix] = v; }
when compiled with g++ -O3 -Wall -c myvec.cc
produces an object file with
% nm -C myvec.o
U GC_free
U GC_malloc
U GC_malloc_atomic
U _Unwind_Resume
0000000000000000 W std::vector<int, gc_allocator<int> >::_M_fill_insert(__gnu_cxx::__normal_iterator<int*, std::vector<int, gc_allocator<int> > >, unsigned long, int const&)
U std::__throw_length_error(char const*)
U __gxx_personality_v0
U memmove
00000000000000b0 T myvec_get
0000000000000000 T myvec_make
00000000000000c0 T myvec_put
00000000000000d0 T myvec_resize
So there is no plain malloc or ::operator new
in the generated code.
So by using gc_allocator
and new(GC)
I apparently can be sure that plain ::opertor new
or malloc
is not used without my knowledge, and I don't need to redefine ::operator new
For future reference (thanks to Sergey Zubkov for mentioning it on Quora in a comment), see also n2670 and <memory>
and garbage collection support (like std::declare_reachable, std::declare_no_pointers, std::pointer_safety etc...). However, that has not been implemented (except in the trivial but acceptable way of making it a no-op) in current GCC or Clang at least.